national

Graphic Australian video of Japanese whaling released

57 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2017 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

57 Comments
Login to comment

its food, many animals are hunted. get over it

0 ( +28 / -28 )

 the images of this horrific slaughter would harm diplomatic relationships with Japan

I'm pretty sure Japan is already damaging diplomatic relationships by ignoring the southern ocean whale sanctuary.

While the whale stocks 'may' be adequate to support a return to commercial whaling (for Japan), Japan does not have an adequate market for the whale meat to make it commercially viable, thus making their whole whaling stance a farce.

-2 ( +21 / -23 )

No... don't talk bad about Japan, its a great country, they are honest, hard working, have a low crime rate, make high quality goods, so don't you Japan bashers start talking bad about Japan over this little thing. Its not like they're the only country in the world sending a fleet to hunt whale in international waters.

-7 ( +15 / -22 )

It's absolutely revolting that Japan would conduct this brutal and pointless slaughter just to thumb its nose at the global community.

Japan does not have an adequate market for the whale meat to make it commercially viable, thus making their whole whaling stance a farce.

Sadly it will will continue as the home port of Japan's only whaling fleet is in Yamaguchi, the base of Shinzo Abe.

-2 ( +18 / -20 )

DisillusionedToday  07:22 am JST

 the images of this horrific slaughter would harm diplomatic relationships with Japan

I'm pretty sure Japan is already damaging diplomatic relationships by ignoring the southern ocean whale sanctuary.

You know very well that IWC Article VIII exempts research whaling from recognizing "sanctuaries".

-1 ( +18 / -19 )

IWC Article VIII exempts research whaling from recognizing "sanctuaries".

Since the point of the 'research' is supposedly to show that commercial whaling would be viable, doing the 'research' in areas where commercial whaling would not be allowed simply shows up the whole fiasco for what it is; mealy-mouthed obfuscation wrapped up in outright lies and served with a side of unadulterated arrogance..

There is no reason at all to torture animals in this way and subject them to this kind of horror. Japan does not need, and does not want, the food. It's just a bunch of stubborn old men hanging on to their honey pot, to the detriment of Japan as a whole.

4 ( +17 / -13 )

Whichever side of the whaling issue you may be on, you should be in no doubt whatsoever that its continuation does Japan's overseas image a great deal of damage. So the question Japan has to ask itself is - is whaling important enough to us as a people to continue doing it, even though it damages the reputation of our country internationally?

12 ( +20 / -8 )

BigYen, retarded nationalism has been a troublemaking tool for about an eternity for the human species. Why would such civilized and advanced civilization as Japan give it up now?

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Australia should arm up and stop the ships. After all, Japan has coast guard mercs on their ships, when not on their coast or anywhere near it, and they have used weapons against other ships, and finally use military satellites for the hunt, so Australia should send military ships out to stop them. Japan is NOT doing this for science, and it is NOT for "ancient culture" (and can't be both anyway). Time to stop this crap.

-8 ( +9 / -17 )

SaikoPhyscoToday 07:39 am JST

No... don't talk bad about Japan, its a great country, they are honest, hard working, have a low crime rate, make high quality goods, so don't you Japan bashers start talking bad about Japan over this little thing. Its not like they're the only country in the world sending a fleet to hunt whale in international waters.

Can't understand if this is sarcastic or not...

8 ( +12 / -4 )

Since the point of the 'research' is supposedly to show that commercial whaling would be viable, doing the 'research' in areas where commercial whaling would not be allowed simply shows up the whole fiasco for what it is; mealy-mouthed obfuscation wrapped up in outright lies and served with a side of unadulterated arrogance..

Excellent point Cleo!

It's absolutely revolting that Japan would conduct this brutal and pointless slaughter just to thumb its nose at the global community.

Of course Alfie! The really sad thing is that the international community really doesn't care. Take Aurstralia and New Zealand, for example. They are the so called champions of the anti whaling industry. When the TPP talks began, they were willing to let the whaling issue slide. New Zealand and Japan are also the only 2 countries to have even ratified the TPP. Yet no mention of the whaling.

Japan really wants the TPP. Australia and New Zealand COULD threaten to railroad it by pulling out of the agreement (if OZ and NW do pull out that could spell the end of the agreement especially if Canada follows suit) if Japan doesn't stop whaling, but they don't. So unfortunately, Japan will continue this barbaric practice while OZ and NZ continue to give mealy mouthed protests.

0 ( +11 / -11 )

Why would Japan be upset about its "research" activities being publicised? Japanese taxpayers have a right to know how their taxes are being wasted.

8 ( +13 / -5 )

The really sad thing is that the international community really doesn't care.

I think the international community cares very much about this farce. Japan, an economic giant, well known for sliding fat envelopes across important tables, is flat-out lying ang getting away with it. However, I think the main problem here is the ICJ and the IWC. When are they going to grow a backbone and do their job properly?

Japan is really quite belligerently doing this. On one hand, they cry victim because NK fires missiles into their waters - and on the other hand they go into waters that are not theirs and arrogantly pull whales from a known sanctuary.

It's only a matter of time before Japan gets a right smacking for doing this. Japan is a nation known for arrogantly and barbarically depleting fish stocks in many waters beyond their own - with no view to see those stocks replenished for the future. This behavior doesn't belong in a civilized world community...

Japan should enjoy their little party while they can, because the plug will be pulled eventually, and Japan might be caught with their hand on their whale-meat sticks.

5 ( +16 / -11 )

AgentX Excellent post! Agree with everything you said

Let me rephrase what I said: the international community doesn't care enough to act as of yet. But really, brilliant post Agent X!

-1 ( +9 / -10 )

Brutally harvesting a toxic marine crop that they can't sell and nobody wants, at a cost of millions to the taxpayer. 21st century political logic.

6 ( +14 / -8 )

Makes me hungry for some whale meat :) Seriously we won't have this problem if the international community came to their senses and took out the species which actually aren't endangered out of the no hunt list.

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

Whichever side of the whaling issue you may be on, you should be in no doubt whatsoever that its continuation does Japan's overseas image a great deal of damage.

haha...what hyperbole. no country besides australia really gives a rats arse if japan is whaling or not. in fact american courts have sided with japan and called sea sheperd activitiess akin to terrorism. so the only stain from all of this is on australia for allowing/encourging eco-terrorism.

-5 ( +9 / -14 )

Disappointing that the Australian Government withheld this footage. It makes you wonder what lengths it will go to to protect Japan.

4 ( +10 / -6 )

[bla bla]...eco-terrorism

Never have I seen more of a bastardization of a good word than this ^. As if giving a being passionate about the environment is akin to hijacking a plane or something. Slap me sideways at the depths these people go to...

Meanwhile, ocean stocks are being murdered for the financial gain of a few tooth-sucking old men on the premise of a lie. Remind me who the terrorists are again??

4 ( +11 / -7 )

After all, Japan has coast guard mercs on their ships, when not on their coast or anywhere near it, and they have used weapons against other ships, and finally use military satellites for the hunt,

Where do you get this fake news?

The whaling fleet have no mercenaries or coast guard personnel on board. Japan has ONE military satellite in geostationary orbit for GPS location and high frequency communication. And it only has range in the northern hemisphere.

2 ( +10 / -8 )

@Beowulf

Read the article again. The Aussie government were in no way looking to release the video. They were intent on protecting Japan's image.

Rightly or wrongly is a wholely different question.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

beerdeliveryguy: "Where do you get this fake news?"

Not fake news, bud... they've been doing it for years. It became most notable when funds were misdirected from donations to Tohoku for such purposes. But here are a few articles that show what I'm talking about (with coast guard being on whaling ships).

http://www.smh.com.au/news/whale-watch/japans-coast-guard-protecting-whalers-from-activists/2008/01/31/1201714116182.html

Now, granted, this next link is from Sea-Shepherd, but it is still fact. The government, as I said, did misuse disaster relief funds for whaling.

http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-commentary/news/archive/international-reaction-to-japan-s-misuse-of-earthquake-relief-funds.html

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/japan-admits-tsunami-funds-used-safeguard-whaling-fleet/

https://www.yahoo.com/news/conservationists-flag-legal-action-over-japan-whale-hunt-033948923.html

In all articles it explicitly talks about Japan sending either coast guard on the ships, or patrol boats along with the fleet. So, I guess you like "alternative facts" if you think this is fake news.

-1 ( +8 / -9 )

lucabrasi, Maybe I was over-zealous in mentioning the Ozzies but what I really meant was that I'm not talking about their govt but the self-righteous hippies who took & edited the videos. Them and the media that always seems to pick on one particular group but turning a blind eye to the dog-eaters, the seal clubbers, the killer whale slaughterers, et al.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

@Beowulf

Sure. As I misspelt before, a wholly different question  : )

4 ( +4 / -0 )

OssanAmerica - You know very well that IWC Article VIII exempts research whaling from recognizing "sanctuaries".

And, you know very well they are researching the viability of a return to commercial whaling in this same sanctuary, which they chose to ignore. Japan's 'lethal research' is tolerated due to the IWC agreement, even though it was deemed to be a farce by the international court. They came back after a year off with a new lethal research plan, but the new lethal research plan still does not justify the killing of hundreds of whales every year. The majority of the data they are collecting can be obtained through non-lethal methods. Whale numbers can be counted by airplane. Tissue samples can be taken with a bow and arrow, not a grenade. The only real data that needs lethal research is stomach contents. However, they don't need to kill 3-400 whales every year to obtain this data. It can be obtained from a few whales every few years. Add to these facts that there is not a sufficient market for whale meat in Japan to sustain commercial whaling and you come back to my original post. It's a complete farce!

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

make high quality goods with falsified data

over this little thing not little to many gaijin

sending a fleet to hunt whale in international waters. no other country in the world sends huge factory ships halfway around the world to hunt in waters of other countries jurisdiction.

its food, many animals are hunted. get over it yeah pet food with high levels of mercury that exceed J gov safety standards, Japanese dont even eat the 6000 tonnes they already have in stock

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Smith, so the coast guard were there that one time to arrest activists if they board ships without permission. Otherwise known as an act of piracy.

I’m against the whaling as well, probably not for the same reason as most, but when activists like SS start making tinfoil hat statements like the CG using deadly force in intentional waters and claiming use of military hardware that does not exist, it reflects badly on the entire anti-whaling crowd.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

BeerDeliveryGuy: "Smith, so the coast guard were there that one time to arrest activists if they board ships without permission. Otherwise known as an act of piracy."

Not just one time. I gave you articles from four different years, and then there are many more. And they are also using ultra-sonic weapons, firing them at helicopters -- that is not "piracy" except by the Japan side.

" like the CG using deadly force in intentional waters"

Which Japan does, like when very clearly ramming ships and using weapons like the one's I mentioned above. But again, that does NOT enable you to send your COAST GUARD into International waters and/or the waters of other nations (Australian sanctuary is debatable, but the Japanese fleet have entered French waters as well, as another example) -- it is NOT part of your coast. Your ship is not an embassy or your nations ground, unless you are also admitting that they invaded other nations, which would be an act of war.

You also fail to touch on how disaster funds were misused to do all this, and on top of everything else no one wants the meat to begin with and it's rotting in freezers while we pay for it.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

If this was filmed in Antarctic waters, and made public by the Austrailian department for border control, I am a little confused as to why it is in the National section of JT and not the World section.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

DisillusionedToday 01:33 pm JSTOssanAmerica - You know very well that IWC Article VIII exempts research whaling from recognizing "sanctuaries".

And, you know very well they are researching the viability of a return to commercial whaling in this same sanctuary, which they chose to ignore.

No I don't and neither do you. We do know that Japan's goal is to get the IWC to lift the moratorium on commercial whaling. But that does not automatically equate to the elimination of currently assigned sanctuaries. After all, the IWC creates sanctuaries for the "preservation of whale stocks for the benefit of the Whaling Industry".

Japan's 'lethal research' is tolerated due to the IWC agreement, even though it was deemed to be a farce by the international court. They came back after a year off with a new lethal research plan, but the new lethal research plan still does not justify the killing of hundreds of whales every year.

Yes , the ICJ ruled the JARPA II program did not meet the requirements of Research Whaling, and hey outlined all the points that would need to be corrected. And guess what, Japan did just that and a year later they started a new program that would pass the test. The US warmed Australia not to file the ICJ case because that would probably happen, but Australia did not listen.

The majority of the data they are collecting can be obtained through non-lethal methods. Whale numbers can be counted by airplane. Tissue samples can be taken with a bow and arrow, not a grenade. The only real data that needs lethal research is stomach contents. However, they don't need to kill 3-400 whales every year to obtain this data. It can be obtained from a few whales every few years. Add to these facts that there is not a sufficient market for whale meat in Japan to sustain commercial whaling and you come back to my original post. It's a complete farce!

1 ( +7 / -6 )

DisillusionedToday 01:33 pm JSTOssanAmerica - You know very well that IWC Article VIII exempts research whaling from recognizing "sanctuaries".

The majority of the data they are collecting can be obtained through non-lethal methods. Whale numbers can be counted by airplane. Tissue samples can be taken with a bow and arrow, not a grenade. The only real data that needs lethal research is stomach contents. However, they don't need to kill 3-400 whales every year to obtain this data. It can be obtained from a few whales every few years.

There are experts in the field whose opinions vary widely. There are even some who argue that the take number are even "too low" of a sampling number to be of value. At the opposite end some believe no fatal sampling numbers are needed at all. As neither of us are cetacean experts don't see the point of debating this.

Add to these facts that there is not a sufficient market for whale meat in Japan to sustain commercial whaling and you come back to my original post. It's a complete farce!

That is a Japanese domestic problem, an economic and marketing problem. Again, don't see how that concerns any of us.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

wtfjapanNov. 29 02:05 pm JSTmake high quality goods with falsified data

over this little thing not little to many gaijin

Most people, gaijin or otherwise, don't care one way or the other.

sending a fleet to hunt whale in international waters. no other country in the world sends huge factory ships halfway around the world to hunt in waters of other countries jurisdiction.

Wow...What country has jurisdiction over International Waters?

its food, many animals are hunted. get over it yeah pet food with high levels of mercury that exceed J gov safety standards, Japanese dont even eat the 6000 tonnes they already have in stock

Have you ever heard of Minemata? You think a country that gained international attention because of it would disregard mercury levels in food? As for whatever is in stock, unless it's yours, don't see why you (or anyone else) should be concerned about it,

1 ( +7 / -6 )

There are even some who argue that the take number are even "too low" of a sampling number to be of value

You would need to provide a (credible) source for a statement like that. Perhaps one of your colleagues can help you scratch one up...

Wow...What country has jurisdiction over International Waters?

What part of the words 'international community' is so hard to understand?

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

That is a Japanese domestic problem, an economic and marketing problem. Again, don't see how that concerns any of us.

None of our business eh? As they are taken in internatonal waters using my tax money, it is my concern and goes straight to the heart of the matter. Despite rock-bottom prices & plentiful supply there simply isn't demand in Japan for whale consumption. So what's the point in catching more whales or pushing for unrestricted catches? No poster has adequately been able to explain this to me.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

ClippetyClopToday 09:07 am JSTThat is a Japanese domestic problem, an economic and marketing problem. Again, don't see how that concerns any of us.

None of our business eh? As they are taken in internatonal waters using my tax money, it is my concern and goes straight to the heart of the matter

How much of your "taxes" do you think have anything to do with whales? If the amount of money that is wasted and foolishly spent not just by Japan but by governments all over the world you really think that the "whale" issue constitutes some significant percentage thatmajes any difference to your life?

3 ( +7 / -4 )

AgentXToday 08:58 am JSTThere are even some who argue that the take number are even "too low" of a sampling number to be of value

You would need to provide a (credible) source for a statement like that. Perhaps one of your colleagues can help you scratch one up...

My colleagues? lol

Wow...What country has jurisdiction over International Waters?

What part of the words 'international community' is so hard to understand?

What part of "International Waters" is so hard to understand? They are called that because NO COUNTRY has jurisdiction over them.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

They are called that because NO COUNTRY has jurisdiction over them.

Correct! Very much including Japan. So you can see now how it is quite arrogant for Japan to wade on in pillaging and destroying these animals for an ego-boost.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

BTW Ossan - do you have that credible source from a scientist/biologist that says 'that the take number are even "too low" of a sampling number to be of value'?

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

If the amount of money that is wasted and foolishly spent not just by Japan but by governments all over the world you really think that the "whale" issue constitutes some significant percentage thatmajes any difference to your life?

At least we can agree that the enterprise is a waste of money. And your implication that unless we can stop 100% of fiscal waste then we shouldn't bother stopping any of it is interesting. Once again you have failed to explain how whaling's economic model can be sustained.

We should just put the whaling communities to work making subsidized betamax videos or something, it would be equally as futile but less destructive to our oceans

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

I want to refer to a comment in the Reddit Australia, which explains the situation of Japanese whaling, and I agreed the most.

https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/7fza40/secret_footage_of_japanese_whale_slaughter/

BicubicSquared

"The Japanese whaling situation is actually a pretty nuanced story.

The only reason Japan signed on to the International Whaling Commission's ban is because the US threatened to revoke Japan's fishing rights in the Bering Sea if they didn't sign. A few years later, US revoked that fishing right anyway. At that point Japan indicated that they intend to back out of the IWC agreement and resume whaling operations. IWC freaked out and told Japan that they'll create a 'scientific whaling' exemption that'll allow Japan to resume whaling but also maintain membership on IWC. Japan agreed and have been adhering to those rules. Unfortunately there's been a sharp increase in anti-whaling sentiment and now people are roasting Japan for their totally fake 'scientific whaling' program that the IWC convinced them to create in the first place.

US basically bullied them into signing IWC and then failed to hold up their part of the bargain. And then IWC begged Japan to stay as long as they called their whaling 'scientific'. Now they're copping sh.t for the obvious farce that the 'scientific whaling' is, even though they never wanted to do anything like that.

Bonus points: All the talk of whaling in 'Australian waters' is bullsh.t. The whaling operations take place in waters that fall under joint ownership of Australia and Japan as part of the Antarctic Treaty. Australia just claims those waters as their own when the topic of whaling comes up. Those claims are legally baseless which is precisely why they can't and won't actually stop Japan from continuing operations.

tl:dr; Japan got screwed by the US and IWC. They have every right to be angry and to continue whaling within the law (they do). Meanwhile Norway's whaling operations eclipse those of Japan but no one cares about that.

Learning the history of Japanese whaling was one of those moments when I realized that what we treat as undisputed fact here in Australia is basically just propaganda that completely covers up the history that created the situation as it is today. The funny thing is every time you see politicians discussing this on TV and saying 'australian waters' and claiming we can take some kind of action, those politicians know all of the above and that AU has absolutely no standing. They just repeat these bullsh.t talking points because they appeal to potential voters."

1 ( +4 / -3 )

 IWC freaked out and told Japan that they'll create a 'scientific whaling' exemption that'll allow Japan to resume whaling but also maintain membership on IWC. Japan agreed and have been adhering to those rules. 

Absolute poppycock, hogwash and out-and-out mendacity. The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling was drawn up and signed into effect in 1946, and it already contained Article 8 at that time. No one created an exception just for Japan; Japan latched on to Article 8 as a loophole they could exploit.

 waters that fall under joint ownership of Australia and Japan as part of the Antarctic Treaty

The Antarctic Treaty was signed by Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the United Kingdom. Japan does not have 'ownership', jointly or otherwise, of any part of the Southern Ocean.

Please check your facts before posting stuff that is untrue.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Antarctic Treaty System:

"The main treaty was opened for signature on December 1, 1959,[1] and officially entered into force on June 23, 1961.[4] The original signatories were the 12 countries active in Antarctica during the International Geophysical Year (IGY) of 1957–58.  The twelve countries that had significant interests in Antarctica at the time were: Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States. These countries had established over 50 Antarctic stations for the IGY. The treaty was a diplomatic expression of the operational and scientific cooperation that had been achieved "on the ice".

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Growing up in Boston and going out on the watches to see whales swimming and interacting in and around the Harbor will leave anyone speechless and in awe. Whales are majestic peaceful creatures that deserve respect. I have seen in Shimonoseki where they serve fried whale. Japan can do with out it. I do not see young Japanese go out of their way to eat whale ever. Only the ole timers. No offence.

Great point below. Hopefully anti-whaling will pick up some traction.

Whichever side of the whaling issue you may be on, you should be in no doubt whatsoever that its continuation does Japan's overseas image a great deal of damage. So true.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Oh, by the way, South Korea is hunting more whales than Japan by "accident".

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/south-korea-whaling-bycatch/

South Korea hunted 1849 whales in 2014, 1997 in 2013, 2751 in 2012 by "accident", by Korean Research Institute. But they only reported to IWC the number of 58 in 2013.

Japan hunted 116 by "accident" (if the whales are alive, they are released and only dead ones are taken - by Japanese fishermen, and 475 as the research whaling in 2013.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSUZbNZoZYg

Sea Shepherd has established their Korean Branch this year. Are they going to criticize ROK or just continue criticizing Japan from ROK?

http://www.sankei.com/west/news/170504/wst1705040036-n1.html

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Korea is a big buyer of Japanese whale meat, both Korea and Russia want to start hunting whales again.

There is a demand for it outside of Japan but Japan gets all the flak.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Oh, by the way, South Korea is hunting more whales than Japan by "accident".

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/south-korea-whaling-bycatch/

That's a FANTASTIC link, Virgo! Of note is picture/slide no. 11. The Norwegians and Icelanders literally turn the beach RED with whale blood. THIS is what I wrote in my earlier post. But I guess the truth of my words hit home a little too hard as my previous post was deleted. The blatant double standards in reporting about whale-hunting, dog-eating and seal-clubbing. Everyone picks on Japan but are too afraid to say anything about the chinanese or the Scandinavians.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

The whaling operations take place in waters that fall under joint ownership of Australia and Japan as part of the Antarctic Treaty.

Where do you get this rubbish?

Read the Articles of the Antarctic Treaty on the Wiki page you quoted from:

Article 6 – *Includes under the treaty all land and ice shelves but *not the surrounding waters south of 60 degrees 00 minutes south

There is no way the Antarctic Treaty could give Japan and Australia, or any other country, 'joint ownership' of the waters Japan is currently killing whales in. The Treaty specifically says the surrounding waters are not covered by the Treaty.

‎www.ats.aq/documents/ats/treaty_original.pdf

Everyone picks on Japan but are too afraid to say anything about the chinanese or the Scandinavians.

This is Japan Today, of course the focus is on Japan. If you want to comment on what the chinanese (sic) or the Scandinavians are doing, you need to go to China Today, Norway Today or Wherever you think the people are up to no good Today.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

AgentXNov. 30 10:04 am JSTBTW Ossan - do you have that credible source from a scientist/biologist that says 'that the take number are even "too low" of a sampling number to be of value'?

The ICJ ruling against Japan's Jarpa II program found, among other things;

"The sample sizes for fin and humpback whales are too small to provide the information that is necessary to pursue the JARPA II research objectives based on Japan’s own calculations, and the programme’s design appears to prevent random sampling of fin whales."

"And if Japan states that it is establishing the dynamics of a changing ecological system, then they absolutely must collect the same number of whales each year. Otherwise the study is ruined for scientific research purposes. Even school children can see that.

But in fact the number of each species of whales killed fluctuated wildly from year to year. In fact, even fluctuating down to zero – which [Editor: big surprise] is not a statistically significant number for genuine research purposes! Take fin whales as an example. 18 fin whales were killed over the first seven seasons of JARPA II, but in subsequent years, zero to three fin whales were killed annually. Nobody was sacked for ruining the study! Take the case of minke whales. JARPA II increased the target sample size to 850 whales a year, and Japan did indeed hunt down 853 minke whales during the 2005-2006 season. But then the number killed shrank to 450 in the several seasons following, then 170 in the 2010-2011 season and finally 103 in the 2012-2013 season"

AgentXNov. 30 10:01 am JSTThey are called that because NO COUNTRY has jurisdiction over them.

Correct! Very much including Japan. So you can see now how it is quite arrogant for Japan to wade on in pillaging and destroying these animals for an ego-boost.

Clearly you do not know what "Jurisdiction" means. All nations are free to carry out activities in International Waters, and all countries do just that. "Arrogance" or "Ego" has nothing to do with it. No country has jurisdiction over International Waters, meaning no country has the authority to unilaterally regulate those activities it.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

SlickdrifterNov. 30 02:39 pm JSTGrowing up in Boston and going out on the watches to see whales swimming and interacting in and around the Harbor will leave anyone speechless and in awe. Whales are majestic peaceful creatures that deserve respect.

The State of Massachusetts has a long history of having very actively participated in the global massacre of whales, adults and calves for whale oil. Whales were harpooned, flensed (blubber cut off) and the rest of the whale tossed overboard as garbage in one the worst examples of wanton waste. You can proud that your state contributed the decimation of the global whale populations in the late 19th century, which was the main reason that the IWC was founded and a moratorium on commercial whaling went into effect.

https://www.whalingmuseum.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling_in_the_United_States

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The State of Massachusetts has a long history of having very actively participated in the global massacre of whales, adults and calves for whale oil.

But they no longer do. Because like Japan, there is minimal demand for whale based products and it isn't worth it. Smart folks them Massachusettsans.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

OssanAmericaToday 12:34 am JST

The ICJ ruling against Japan's Jarpa II program found, among other things;

......... [snip]

Interesting. I think I found your source... FriendsofJapaneseWhaling.com Complete with its nice little Imperial Japanese flag on the banner of the Wordpress website. I'm sorry but the website smacks of right-wing propaganda! As do most of the comments you make in regards to whaling. When I asked for a credible source I thought you could do better.

From the cherry picked, and out of context, excerpts of the same court findings from that website came this (complete with comments from the blog referred to above):

"The Court’s view of all this is that the sample sizes [**Editor: the number of whales to be killed each year] and the launch date for JARPA II were ‘not driven by strictly scientific considerations’. **[Editor: In other words, it had little, if anything, to do with ‘scientific research’ and a lot to do with … wild guess from me here … politics and money.]"

Even when you pro-whaling, Japan-can-not-do-wrong, right-wing extremists try to manufacture stuff to support your arguments - you still fail to convince anyone bar the most ill-informed of people.

Like I said in a post above; in regards to the whaling farce, Japan's day will come.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

AgentXToday 10:56 am JSTOssanAmericaToday 12:34 am JST

The ICJ ruling against Japan's Jarpa II program found, among other things;

......... [snip]

Interesting. I think I found your source... FriendsofJapaneseWhaling.com Complete with its nice little Imperial Japanese flag on the banner of the Wordpress website. I'm sorry but the website smacks of right-wing propaganda!

LOL. It's an anti-whaling site. Read it carefully and you will see that it is sarcastic.

You can look up the ICJ's finding on your own, it will match what was quoted.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Let me help you.

" Secondly, the sample sizes for fin and humpback whales are too small to provide the information that is necessary to pursue the JARPA II research objectives based on Japan’s own calculations, and the programme’s design appears to prevent random sampling of fin whales."

(d) Conclusion regarding the application of Article VIII, paragraph 1, to JARPA II (paras. 223-227)

http://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/148/18160.pdf

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Not only the movie "The Cove", I recommend to watch "Behind the Cove" and "Okujirasama" to see the situation more neutrally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZO9S8McewY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=52&v=bggGCJ8PNi0

(Sorry but the English subtitle is not correct for Japanese part.)

1 ( +3 / -2 )

It's an anti-whaling site.

Maybe so (TBH I didn't spend any time there), but it matches the parenthesis copy/paste in your post that I responded too.

You can look up the ICJ's finding on your own, it will match what was quoted.

As you correctly point out above, the best source for your information is indeed the ICJ's summary that you linked to. But it's staggering that when forming your arguments that you repeatedly cherry pick a particular point and take it out of context while conveniently ignore the surrounding findings. For example, reading on from your excerpt above;

Fourthly, some evidence suggests that the programme could have been adjusted to achieve a far smaller sample size, and Japan does not explain why this was not done. The evidence before the Court further suggests that little attention was given to the possibility of using non-lethal research methods more extensively to achieve the JARPAII objectives and that funding considerations, rather than strictly scientific criteria, played a role in the programme’s design.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Behind "THE COVE" digest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVGklokZYWI

This is what is called a documentary. I don't think "The Cove" is, because they used red color as an effect, mixing the whaling scenes at the Faroe Islands into the film, and so on. This is a cheating as a documentary.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

AgentXToday 01:25 pm JSTIt's an anti-whaling site.

Maybe so (TBH I didn't spend any time there), but it matches the parenthesis copy/paste in your post that I responded too.

You can look up the ICJ's finding on your own, it will match what was quoted.

As you correctly point out above, the best source for your information is indeed the ICJ's summary that you linked to. But it's staggering that when forming your arguments that you repeatedly cherry pick a particular point and take it out of context while conveniently ignore the surrounding findings. For example, reading on from your excerpt above;

Fourthly, some evidence suggests that the programme could have been adjusted to achieve a far smaller sample size, and Japan does not explain why this was not done. The evidence before the Court further suggests that little attention was given to the possibility of using non-lethal research methods more extensively to achieve the JARPAII objectives and that funding considerations, rather than strictly scientific criteria, played a role in the programme’s design.

I am not "cherry picking" anything. I am only answering your specific ad repeated demand that I substantiate that there is a view that "the take size was too small of a sampling size to be of value". You are the one who persisted that I do so and I have complied. Have a nice day.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites